Crosby v. Scott-Graff Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for St. Louis county, Dibell, J., granting plaintiff's motion to strike out a part of defendant’s answer, and denying defendant’s motion to make Charlotte V. Crosby, plaintiff’s wife, a party to the action and to require her to reply to the answer.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
Action in the district court of the county of St. Louis to recover damages for the breach of a contract between the parties, whereby the defendant agreed to make and furnish to the plaintiff the mill and wood work for a dwelling house which he was erecting. This is an appeal from an order granting the plaintiff’s motion to strike out a part of the defendant’s answer, and denyirig the defendant's motion to have the wife of the plaintiff made a party to the action, and to require her to reply to the defendant’s counterclaim.
If the action of the trial court in striking out the part of the answer…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Vaule v. MillerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
- Clay County Land Co. v. AlcoxSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
3Cited by6 opinions
- Noyes v. OstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Williams v. HowesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- Eimon Mercantile Co. v. CassidySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- Lewis v. BabcockSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
- Schau v. BussSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.